Oscar predictions: Who should - and will - win at the Academy Awards

Wednesday

Feb 22, 2017 at 11:07 AMFeb 22, 2017 at 3:59 PM

By Al Alexander/For The Patriot Ledger

When Jimmy Kimmel opens the 89th Academy Awards on Sunday night, you can likely expect one of his patented “Drunk Trump” segments. But it’s the more sobering side of the president that will likely dominate the acceptance speeches, as one of the most diverse group of nominees in Oscar history will take the Dolby Theatre stage to accept and present the awards.

In many ways, Trump is the best thing to happen to the hopefuls from Islamic nations. They, including Iranian director Asghar Farhadi, a nominee for “The Salesman,” are likely to gain from the Academy’s “sympathy” vote in the wake of Trump’s Muslim travel ban. Farhadi, a previous winner for 2011’s “A Separation,” has already announced he’s boycotting the ceremony because of the ban. And in the Documentary Shorts category, the frontrunning “White Helmets” is likely to generate similar support for its story about Syrian civil defense crews pulling dead and wounded bodies from the rubble of buildings in cities like Aleppo, where Trump-admirer Vladimir Putin has ordered air strikes on women, children and hospitals.

Yes, politics will be front and center when the show begins at 8:30 on ABC. But the night is all but guaranteed to belong to “La La Land” and its record-tying 14 nominations. Look for it to score wins for Best Picture, Best Actress (Emma Stone), Best Director (Damien Chazelle), cinematographer (Linus Sandgren), production designer (David Wasco and Sandy Reynolds-Wasco), song (the almost annoyingly catchy “City of Stars”) and score (Justin Hurwitz).

The only real drama will be for Best Actor, where local hero Casey Affleck (for “Manchester by the Sea”) is in a dead heat with “Fences” star Denzel Washington. Should the latter win, along with heavy favorites Viola Davis (“Fences) for Best Supporting Actress and Mahershala Ali (“Moonlight”) for Best Supporting Actor, it would mark the first time three African Americans took home Oscars in the acting categories. Which would be fitting since this is already the first year black actors have scored nominations in all four categories.

Yet, the night might be overshadowed by Trump, who was the subject of many acceptance speeches at the Golden Globe and SAG awards. So I doubt he’ll be attending. But his presence will definitely be felt.

Shouldn’t be here: “Lion” suffers from bipolar filmmaking, mating a gritty, deeply involving first half with a sappy, yawn-inducing final act.

Should be here: “Love and Friendship” was Jane Austen the way it’s meant to be done: funny, classy and opulent in both its look and in its execution.

Should win: “Manchester by the Sea” boasted the entire package of fine writing, terrific acting and exacting cinematography that accurately captured both the look and feel of working class Massachusetts.

Will win: Damien Chazelle’s “La La Land” was so unlike any movie of recent memory; in that it was both innovative in its riffs on old Hollywood and its ability to appeal to a mass audience without forcing film buffs to check their brains at the door. But backlash from critics who find its story slight might open the door for either “Moonlight” or SAG-winner “Hidden Figures” to sneak in.

Shouldn’t be here: Gosling was fine as Emma Stone’s jazz-loving partner in “La La Land,” but he’s no Fred Astaire.

Should be here: Adam Driver’s quiet, but affecting performance in the grossly overlooked “Paterson” was a master class in subtlety and nuance.

Should win: Casey Affleck set a new standard for portraying a father wracked by grief in Kenneth Lonergan’s heartbreaking story of a Massachusetts janitor struggling to cleanup his life after suffering the worst of tragedies. But recent accusations of sexual harassment aimed at him by two workers on the set of his directorial debut, “I’m Still Here,” have all but ended his chances.

Will win: For me, Washington was a bit over the top in his ferocious turn as a bitter 1950’s-era African-American wrongly denied his piece of the American pie. But the skill in which he wrapped his booming voice around August Wilson’s marvelously written words was nothing short of transforming.

Shouldn’t be here: Streep and Portman were both trying too hard in turning real-life characters into grating annoyances. Plus, both already have Oscars for far better work in far better movies.

Should be here: The absences of “Arrival’s” Amy Adams and Taraji P. Henson from “Hidden Figures” are real head-scratchers, considering how essential each were in earning their respective films so much love from the Academy.

Should win: Isabelle Huppert was outstanding in not one, but two, terrific films in “Elle” and “Things to Come,” waking up critics and Academy voters to what a hidden gem the 63-year-old actress has been over the past four decades.

Will win: This will be a showdown between Stone and Huppert, both recipients of Golden Globes in January. But Stone should have the edge given that she also prevailed at the SAGs and BAFTAs for her affecting portrayal of a woman caught between her love for her man and her love for her art. In “La La Land,” she sang and danced with passable skill, but it was her infectious charm and charisma that will land her her first Oscar.

Shouldn’t be here: Patel was actually the weakest link in “Lion.” When he appeared at the midway point, taking over for pint-sized scene-stealer Sunny Pawar, the film lost all its heft and momentum.

Should be here: Sunny Pawar may only be 8 years old, but what he does in the first half of “Lion” as an orphan lost in the cut-throat streets of Calcutta was up there with Patel’s own work in his equally spectacular debut in “Slumdog Millionaire.”

Should win: Jeff Bridges was the heart and soul of “Hell or High Water,” playing a lawmen who loved his country but hated what the politicians were doing to it.

Will win: This is Ali’s Oscar to lose. In fact, he might be the night’s biggest lock for his strong, sensitive portrayal of a compassionate drug dealer in “Moonlight.”

Shouldn’t be here: Kidman’s role as the kindhearted adoptive mother in “Lion” was easily her best work in years. But was it really Oscar worthy? I think not.

Should be here: If you want to talk about the true meaning of “supporting,” take a long look at Lily Gladstone in Kelly Reichardt’s “Certain Women.” As a lonely ranch hand in desperate search of human companionship, she was a revelation, using little more than heartbreaking facial expressions to make crystal clear the pain of loneliness and rejection.

Should win: I really, really liked what Michelle Williams did with three or four short, but powerful scenes opposite Casey Affleck in “Manchester by the Sea.” She didn’t just show the pain of a woman recovering from a great tragedy; she made you feel it.

Will win: This is clearly Viola Davis’ year, but will her show-stopping turn as a betrayed wife in “Fences” make up for the two previous nominations (“The Help” and “Doubt”) for which she clearly should have won? Like they say, better late than never.

Shouldn’t be here: Gibson’s well-documented anti-Semitism may have been forgiven, but to give him an Oscar nod to boot for a film that didn’t even find its footing until halfway through is a much too generous peace offering.

Should be here: What David Mackenzie did with the fun, absorbing “Hell or High Water” was just too outstanding to overlook. And unlike Gibson, he sustained his film’s power from start to breathtaking finish.

Should win: Chazelle may only be 31, but he possesses the skill set of an aged veteran like Scorsese or Eastwood. And it shows in how he gets every little detail right in his magnificent “La La Land.”

Will win: After winning every post-season prize possible, including the coveted Director’s Guild Award, it looks like Chazelle will make it a clean sweep with the Oscar.

ANIMATED

The nominees: “Kubo and the Two Strings”; “Moana”; “My Life as a Zucchini”; “The Red Turtle”; “Zootopia”

Shouldn’t be here: Much praise has been heaped upon “Kubo,” but I found it to be little more than an overly busy martial arts exercise full of dull characters languishing in an even duller story.

Should be here: The omission of the smart and endlessly original “April and the Extraordinary World” is simply inexcusable. It was as beautiful as it was transporting, but apparently too smart for voters who favored inferior efforts like “Kubo” and “Moana” over it.

Should win: Like “April,” “My Life as a Zucchini” is a visually sumptuous, highly involving tale that takes a child’s eye view of the world, yet avoids condescension and emphasizes truth in a bold, invigorating way.

Will win: Some will say “Zootopia” is a reflection of our racial intolerance. But sadly, it’s more a case of life imitating art, as the script for this amazingly insightful movie was written years before the rise of Trump.

Shouldn’t be here: “Fire at Sea” and “Life, Animated” both suffered from obviously staged scenes, severely detracting from their impact.

Should be here: “Weiner” and “Gleason” were both outstanding examples of how documentaries are meant to present affecting slices of real life. And if what I believe is true – that “Weiner” was passed over because voters blamed that film’s subject, Anthony Weiner, for Hillary’s loss to Trump – it’s beyond the scope of childishness.

Should win: “13th” and “I Am Not Your Negro” were both outstanding in their prescient purview of race in America. And in any other year, they’d win the prize easily. But Ezra Edelman’s seven-plus hour dissection of our nation’s double standard on race was just so eye-opening, not to mention clever in how it used the O.J. Simpson murder trial to encapsulate 400 years of racial inequality, that it makes this a no-brainer.

Will win: O.J. was a football star, but for Edelman, this is a good old-fashioned slam dunk.

What should: “Elle.” How can Isabelle Huppert score a rare Best Actress nomination for a foreign-language film without the film itself not getting a nod? Her amazing work in Paul Verhoeven’s funny, nasty tale of vengeance and guilt was just too delicious to ignore. So, why was it?

Should win: It’s a tough call between Asghar Farhadi’s “The Salesman” and Hannes Holm’s “Ove,” but I’m going to go with the latter because of its ability to address Muslim immigration in Europe with a story boiling over with warmth and deft comedy.

Will win: A month ago, I would have told you the overrated “Toni Erdmann” was a lock, but in the wake of Trump’s Muslim travel ban, voter sympathy now lies firmly with Farhadi, an Iranian who is just one of the innocents locked out by the directive. Besides that, “The Salesman” is one helluva crime thriller, addressing guilt, obsession and the lack of respect and honor for women repressed by Sharia Law.

Shouldn’t be here: “The Lobster” was fascinating, but a bit too discombobulated to earn an Oscar nod.

Should be here: Matt Ross, whose “Captain Fantastic” was a hilarious, relevant take on how consumerism and greed is turning our children into selfish, unfeeling automatons.

Should win: If you want to talk great writing, it’s hard to beat Lonergan’s heart-tugging tale of grief and redemption in “Manchester by the Sea.”

Will win: Like Chazelle has won every directing reward for “La La Land,” the same has been true for his highly original screenplay, which mixed music and romance with important questions about what you value more: love or love of being true to yourself.

Shouldn’t be here: Luke Davies wrote half of a good movie with “Lion,” but the final hour slipped into clichéd sap.

Should be here: With “Love and Friendship,” Whit Stillman fully embraced his inner Jane Austen with his bitingly funny tale of high-class women and the hapless boobs who adore them.

Should win: The duo behind “Hidden Figures” didn’t display much edge or drama, but their script about three intelligent black women doing it for themselves was arguably the most entertaining movie of the year.

Will win: Here’s where “Moonlight” will shine brightest for its writer-director, Barry Jenkins. And the award will be well-deserved for a man who movingly showed what it means to be both black and gay in an often intolerant world.